top-tier missiles can still be flared off inside of 1km. lol. Time to go to DCS where the physics apply.
Would you rather it be 100% realistic so if a missile is fired, you insta-die? Gameplay is important. Sacrificing that slight level of realism in exchange for top tier being actually playable sounds like a worthy tradeoff.
4 Likes
If it’s in the front or side aspect, that’s entirely possible on a non-AB target.
Happens in DCS even more so since DCS has more powerful flares.
Its frustrating when you are in the middle of an intense dogfight, you get a missile off and the target defeats it with one button press.
1 Like
I’m kind of okay with that. It’s irritating if you are the attacker, but also, if you are being chased, it means you won’t insta-die always. I generally don’t support sacrificing realism. I think nerfing missile performance is okay though. That much I am willing to sacrifice because the game needs to be playable. Missiles can pull as many Gs as they want, the nerfing I’m talking about is making them actually flarable.
E.g. I’m irritated when my Magic 2 is flared, but also, the alternative is me always dying whenever someone fires a Magic 2 at me.
2 Likes
True, though in my experience, it’s less on the missile and more on the defending aircraft.
Currently, (as far as I am aware) IR seekers look at the aircrafts engine temps and not the exhaust plume. This means that some aircraft on full reheat can actually be colder than some non-AB aircraft. (F-5C is WAY colder than the Harrier for example)
This means that the Harrier has to actively defend against say an Aim-9L, often pulling extremely high G maneveurs and deploy multiple flares. Meanwhile an aircraft like the F-5C, can often defeat the same 9L, whilst sat on full reheat, with a single flare, whilst flying in a straight line.
This is an infuriating imbalance.
So, I really want them to overhaul the IR signatures of aircraft. Either realisitcally modeling the IR signature of a reheat plume or simply adding some kind of multiplier to an aircraft on reheat. Which would reduce the effectiveness of flares / increase the effectiveness of IR missiles vs reheating targets.
We have IRL documentation from the RAF that states Aim-9Ls should be basically undefeatable by flares alone in rear aspect when fired at a target on reheat.
So for someone to defeat say a 9L, theyd actually have to throttle down and actively defend against the missile and not just press one button. It would level the playing field and make the game more fair from a gameplay perspective. It would also mitigate just spamming flares to be immune to IR missiles.
On the flip side, you also have the countermeasures. There can be a wide range of imbalances from that too. BOL for example recently got quite a major (and totally unrealistic) nerf to its effectiveness at defeating all missiles (both IR via the “flares” and SARH via the Chaff). Meaning in something like the Tornado F3, an already quite hot target, an IR missiles has a much easier time hitting me / I have a much harder time defeating it, because my primary CMs are significantly less effective than the target I may be firing at. (my experience in fighting aircraft like Mig-23s and Mig-29s, they often just have to dump 1 or 2 flares)
In either case. Whilst yes, we probably shouldnt get totally undefeatable IR missiles, its not a level playing field and I dont think IR missiles should be defeated with one better press. I think it should require at a minimum, throttling down to below reheat and maybe a bit of turning
6 Likes
Honestly it would be nice if all missiles were a bit more capable. Would incentivize more tactical flying, rather than the fuckfest we currently have. Especially an overhaul on multi-pathing would create a lot more variety in air, instead of everyone having to just grass cut. Just would need pairing with larger maps and/or more spawn locations
3 Likes
I think in this scenario the honest issue is the defenders placement. If someone gets within 1km, they deserve to get the kill. Why am I grinding so much of my time away at this game if it’s just going to be “balanced” out of my hands…
I wish I could afford DCS for reasons like this. I feel a little jipped I didn’t get to experience IRCCM when it had a point to it lol.
Edit:
My point is that if you are not paying attention to your surroundings, or put yourself in a bad place. You shouldn’t have the option to just escape modern IRCCM without pretty insane maneuvers + flaring. Which within 1km probably isn’t happening.
1 Like
the problem is that there are too many players and too many third-party interference, if it were 8vs8 it would give rise to better fights and therefore also focus on defending against a missile. yesterday for example the game was broken and always showed the small version of the Spain map and 16vs16 at 12.7 was unplayable, I could launch my missile as soon as I took off, furthermore against radar missiles the chaffs are now practically useless, besides the fact that they don’t it makes sense to have mixed countermeasures and waste them by using them together when perhaps you only need one type at a time, and you are already penalized because by having them mixed you halve the quantity, plus wasting flare or chaff when you only need one type in a given situation, based on the missile that they shoot at you
That is hopefully being fixed next major update according to road map
That I agree with, but even in ASB (which I usually play) when 1v1s are quite common. I still find the IR missile vs Flare balance off.
1 Like
Unfortunately I don’t play ASB, but those who do say that it’s broken as a mode, and that they don’t spend time perfecting it
Yeah, its 90% abdandoned by the devs. Quite often they forget it even exists when explaining new mechanics and features.
But… it has its strengths as well. Like the bracket rotation system which means uptiers/downtiers dont exist (by making it optional), the much larger maps and PvPvE gameplay meaning strike aircraft are actually playable
I agree that such a rework of aircraft IR signatures is very much needed. I also at the same time am quite against reducing the effectiveness of flares. I do agree that more skill in defeating missiles would be nice, but I think that it should not take an extreme amount of skill to dodge missiles, just a decent-ish knowledge of what you’re doing.
I disagree with this on every concievable level. It is entirely possible for you to keep your situational awareness and for someone to get within 1 km of you. Making within a 1 km practically a guarenteed kill removes the few dogfights still left in top tier. Dogfights are not very common in top tier anymore, but the ones that are left are very fun. This would remove nearly all of those.
I somewhat disagree. You should need maneuvering + flares to escape IRCCM missiles. You should not need insane maneuvering to do that. You should need to know what you’re doing. You should not need to be god tier at maneuvers.
The overall point I’m making here is that while I am against ahistorically nerfing vehicles, slightly fudging the performance characteristics of AAMs is something I am okay with. In their current state they do need changes. However, top tier also needs to have a level of actual playability beyond who sees the other person first. Who sees the other person first obviously should matter, just like in real life, but War Thunder is not real life. War Thunder is a game. Games are designed to be fun (cue blah blah Gaijin bashing, you get my point). I’d say a somewhat nerfing missile’s ability to defeat flares is an okay thing to do. You should still need the maneuver + flare to defeat them, it should take skill, but it should not take a ridiculous level of skill because top tier needs to be actually playable beyond who fires first.